Kamis, 29 September 2016

How Can The Church Thrive In A Non-Christian World?

How Can The Church Thrive In A Non-Christian World?

If
our churches have to be a little more uncomfortable to us insiders in
order to reach even one lost soul for Christ, that’s a sacrifice we
should all be willing to make. |

Ed Stetzer

Next month, I’ll be emceeing and speaking at Centered and Sent,
on October 18 and 19, at The Summit Church in Durham, N.C. We’ll be
hosting The Exchange Live from the conference on stage on October 18 at
3:00 p.m. This two-day gathering will also feature Tim Keller, Bryan
Loritts, and J.D. Greear. We are going to address how the Church can
thrive in an increasingly post-Christian era. I will be speaking on
“Cultural Trends and the State of the Church.” Join me at this limited seat event.

As we all know, it’s election season. This isn’t ever a
rosy time for America, filled with rainbows and warm hugs. But if the
political season of 2016 has taught us anything, it’s that the United
States is culturally confused. Competing narratives vie for attention,
as we’re trying to figure out just who we are as a country. There was a
time in our history when it seemed like everyone was a Christian. Now,
depending on where in America you live, it can seem like no one is a Christian.

Are we losing our Christian heritage? Were we ever a
Christian nation to begin with? And how should churches respond to all
of this?

However you read our country’s history, it’s becoming
increasingly clear that we have reached a cultural tipping point. Our
society no longer assumes the gospel, which means the Church
often stands at odds with the rest of society. That may make us
uncomfortable and frightened. We like being in the majority.

But the gospel is always clearer in an age when it is not culturally
assumed. The Early Church thrived in the midst of a hostile
non-Christian world—not because they were more numerous or more
powerful, but because they were both radically distinct and culturally relevant.

Radically Distinct

Many of us in North America, especially the older ones among us, grew up in a context where Christianity was assumed.

It may be more comfortable to grow up in an age when
everyone calls themselves Christian, but I would argue that it’s
actually harmful to the gospel. When the gospel doesn’t stand out as
distinct, then we domesticate it into our tradition. That’s what we see
going on in evangelical regions across the country.

Even now, upward of 75% of Americans call themselves
Christians. But about two-thirds of that group don’t go to church, don’t
believe the Bible, and don’t subscribe to anything like Christian
ethics. Sure, they care about Jesus, but it’s certainly not central to
their lives. These people are nominal Christians—retaining the name of
Christ, but just about nothing else.

Recent research from Pew, however, has shown that nominal Christians are disappearing.
This is hardly surprising. In the midst of a society that is growing
more and more antagonistic toward Christianity, the first to abandon
ship are going to be the ones who never really believed in Jesus anyway.

Nominalism is dying. And I say, “Good riddance.” I, for
one, am ready for the gospel to mean the gospel, and for Christians to
be known as Christians. People need to see that “Christian” isn’t just a
check-box on a questionnaire, but it’s a life changed by the gospel.

In a place where most people call themselves Christians
(but really aren’t), it can be hard to make people see how radically
distinct the gospel is. But in a place where most people admit they
aren’t Christians, where they actually find the gospel offensive, that is where the gospel is going to make an impact.

Being a Christian is more significant in a hostile or indifferent culture than in friendly surroundings.

As nominal Christianity declines, and as more people
have the integrity to say, “I don’t believe the gospel,” the mission of
the Church becomes much clearer, and easier. We may not like losing our
home field advantage in this country, but it’s far easier to share the
gospel with those who don’t think that they are already right with God.

As nominal Christians drop the façade of religiosity for
the honesty of not following a faith at all, it becomes easier to share
the gospel.

We can bemoan the loss of Christian influence in our
country. Or we can seize this moment for what it is—an opportunity to
make much of Jesus and His mission, to show our neighbors that the
gospel really is radically distinct, and to realize that we now live in
the midst of an enormous mission field.

Culturally Relevant

Nominal Christians need to be reminded that the gospel
is distinct. Many true, convictional Christians need to hear that, too.
But many of us are too ready to ‘make the gospel distinct’ by doubling
down on our strange little church sub-cultures. The way to respond to a
rapidly changing and post-Christian culture isn’t to resist change
altogether. It’s to allow the gospel to dictate what changes are worth
making.

Many of our churches stand as visible reminders that
we’ve valued our sub-cultures more than the people to whom we’ve been
sent, and we’ve refused to change. We’d rather do things how grandma did
them than care about reaching her grandkids.

Culture is always changing. Always. You can resist it or
ignore it or grieve it or wish it weren’t so, but that won’t make it
any less real. And the more we insist on doing “business as usual” in
our churches, the more we’ll find ourselves being ineffective.

In the business world, IBM, Xerox, Kodak, and many
others learned this principle the hard way. There are myriad companies,
once giants in industry, which either disappeared completely or are
shells of what they once were because they did not see the need for
change.

So, if we are going to continue to communicate the
message of the gospel meaningfully, our churches must change as well. If
it feels like you are stepping in a time machine to worship with your
church, it’s worth asking if that’s because you’re holding fast to the
timeless truth of the gospel, or because you’re trapped in your
traditionalism. If you think you know the answer to that question, ask
it again. And ask others. You may not be as contextual as you think.

Contextualizing the gospel message doesn’t make it less distinct. It simply amplifies what makes
it distinct. People shouldn’t come into our churches and primarily find
the culture bizarre. They should find the message of the gospel
bizarre.

We don’t contextualize to minimize the confrontational
claims of Christianity, but to maximize them. It’s a matter of putting
the gospel into language that our neighbors can hear and understand.

In the midst of a society that wants to do away with
Christianity, it’s easy to fall into the temptation of wanting to make
our churches comfortable refuges. But Jesus calls His Church to mission,
which means that the way we do church should focus less on our comfort
and more on faithfully reaching the lost.

If our churches have to be a little more uncomfortable
to us insiders in order to reach even one lost soul for Christ, that’s a
sacrifice we should all be willing to make.

Being radically distinct and culturally relevant aren’t
at odds. They are two sides of the same gospel coin. Jesus came and made
his home among us in the most culturally relevant way possible. He
embodied the language and culture and traditions of the Jewish people.

And yet he never tired of holding out a gospel message
that was radically distinct, challenging all who heard Him to trade in
their worthless religion for a true relationship with God.

If we aim for being distinct or relevant, we miss out on the heart of Jesus. He embodied both, and He calls His Church to do the same today.